I'll take the under. Call it base 650k + Options.

Timbre of this thread seems to be “having had a decade, surely Cessna could have come up with a new plane that does 200 ktas on 200 hp burning 10 gph for 200k.”

Laws of physics were not suspended in the interim. Basic choices are Bonanza/182/210 sort of design, a Cirrus type design, or a Glasair sort of thing. So Cessna picks the one they already made and know how to sell.

The turbo 182 is like the McRib. Just reintroduce it every few years and make a few.

Does the 182 airframe have the bones so that a cantilever wing could be designed for it?

Nope. I don't think it would be easy to modify the airframe for it, either. With all the work that would need to be done, it would probably be easier to do a clean-sheet design.

It would make more sense to restart 210 production.

Nope. I don't think it would be easy to modify the airframe for it, either. With all the work that would need to be done, it would probably be easier to do a clean-sheet design.

A lot depends on the UL. If the 182 can fill the seats and fly for 6 hours, it's got stuff the Cirrus doesn't have, while costing significantly less. If it gets bloated with heavy, costly options, that's a different story.

The 182 is impossible to beat. It has it all safety, reliability, super strong air frame, cheap to insure, easy to fly, good ul, short field flexibility...exactly how do you do better? Go faster? Why do you need to go faster when the average GA flight is under 200 nm? Speed comes with penalties besides its faster than driving and a person with private can fly it without issue and doesn't need to sweat the cost of every flight. The person that flys this will be able to do so long after that jet/twin/200knt fantasy single is rotting in the hanger because the owner is too old or flys to infrequently to operate it safely or finances have made it unaffordable.

The price is out of my range but makes sense all thing considering. You can even have a chute if you want.

It would make more sense to restart 210 production.

The 182 is The World's Most Adequate Airplane (tm).
The Turbo version is even more adequate.

The 182 really do everything "good enough" for most missions and are comfortable to sit in for pilot and pax. I have a lot of 182 time from early in my flying career. They really are nice airplanes.

I think Textron is seeing the froth in the market and trying to capitalize on people looking to move up or buy new.

I read somewhere that some Cessna functionary said that Cessna would never build another SE retract.

It reminded me of a interview Flying magazine did with Beech in the late 80’s. The interviewer asked innocuously about the Musketeer line, and the Beech guy said point blank “The facilities & tooling are dismantled and the folks that built them are long gone. They’re not coming back, ever”.

Best,
Rich

I've always thought of 182s as being the Toyota 4Runner of the sky. Old design, low-tech, not very economical, not very fast, but an almost unbreakable load-it-and-go-anywhere airplane that basically just needs gas and oil and will reward you with very low depreciation.

I want one. I wish I'd bought one a few years ago when I first wanted one and the Q models were priced about half of what they are today.

It would make more sense to restart 210 production.

So are you!

The 210 with strut first became the 205. The 205 became the 206 a couple years later.